Sahjad Mian vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 3699 Jhar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 564 of 2022
                                           ....

1. Sahjad Mian

2. Mobarak Hussain @ Mubarak Mian

3. Kashim Mian @ Kashim

4. Saliman Khatoon

5. Abbash Ansari

6. Dblu Miyan @ Idrish Miyan

7. Md. Insar Ansari @ Ishrail Mian .... Appellants Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Piyaswa Devi .... Respondents ....

             CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

                For the Appellants             : Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, Adv.
                For the State                  : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, APP
                For the Res. No.2              : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Adv.
                                               ....

05/14.09.2022             The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled

Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned APP as well as learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

The present appeal has been filed against the orders dated 21.06.2022 and 11.07.2022 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hazaribag in A.B.P. No.860 of 2022, arising out of SC/ST Complaint Case No.67 of 2019, registered for the offence under Sections 147/ 148/ 384/ 386/ 379/ 504/ 323/ 341/ 448/ 427/ 354(B)/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (iv)

(v)(x)(xi)(xv) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by which prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants have been rejected.

The appellants have approached this court for grant of anticipatory bail although the same is barred under Section 18 of the SC/ ST (PoA) Act.

It appears, there is a land dispute between the parties and 144 Cr.P.C. proceeding has also been initiated.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Hazaribag vide its order dated 10.01.2022 passed in Case No.259 of 2021 has noted down that there is dispute of title as well as possession over the said piece of land. The informant has also deposed to the said fact before the court below. Referring to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma Vrs. State of Uttarakhand reported in 2020 (10) SCC 710, it has been submitted that since there is a serious dispute of title as well as possession over a piece of land and as such the benefit of Section 438 Cr.P.C. may be extended to the appellants.

Learned APP and learned counsel for the victim has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellants and submitted that this is a "khatiyani land" of the victim and her possession is being disturbed by the present appellants and they had abused her also.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the record, it appears that there is land dispute between the parties as it is evident from the order passed by the S.D.O., Sadar, Hazaribag as well as the deposition of the victim herself.

Considering the above fact, the appellants are directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of the copy of this order, and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail, on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hazaribag in connection with SC/ST Complaint Case No.67 of 2019, on the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Shahid/